Well at least you've accurately assessed your interpretation of the law.

You are not committing an offence if you simply talk him out of committing a crime.
You are if he is already committing the crime & you intentionally frustrate the Police getting the evidence required to prosecute.

So why before every fixed camera I can remember is there a speed camera warning sign? In my experience people don't just waste money.

It may be different if an officer is on customer relations duty hiding behind a bush on the bit of road which isn't signed properly and everyone gets it wrong but for fixed cameras I'd bet your life on the fact current policy was there had to be a sign.

Any way back to my post, could you answer the points I raised?

Thanks.

Henry

Interestingly I know of at least 2 (and suspect many more) forces that no longer operate fixed cameras at all. The local scammers still run the vans (the operating sites of which are published daily) but thats all.

North Yorkshire.
Durham?

Well I got a nice flash of the headlights this evening coming into a village, it was from a nice chap in a 6 series. And sure enough there was a scum van just up the road. It didn't matter though as I was behind a van which was behind an old duffer doing about 3mph. I immediately phoned my mate who was about 5 mins behind me.

So did either me or the BM driver commit any offence? I believe not. I didn't even know if my mate was in his car or not, so how could I tell if he was speeding. So surely if I dont know that somebody is committing a crime in the first place how can I be done for obstruction.
Supposing somebody asks me where the local police station is, if I tell him or her is it an offence as they might be trying to avoid it. Its all bks if you ask me and just a way for the police to protect their revenue stream by bullying.

Which brings me onto another point, when the partenrships were setup and every man and his dog were getting done the police went to great lengths to distance themselves from the whole setups saying it was nothing to do with them, blame the partnerships. Now there is a in the armour they are all over it like a bad smell again.

As for my reason for flashing someone, which I will continue to do, its plain and simple, to deprive the government or whoever out of £60, I think they get far too much off everyone as it is.

Immaterial.

Hmm, I guess if a robbery gets committed I consider it a genuine crime even if the culprit is never caught. If a man exceeds the speed limit in his car but no one gets hurt and he doesn't get caught I don't consider that a crime has been committed. I would guess that the majority of the population would take a similar view. If it is considered a crime then I you would have to consider each and every member of PH as a criminal.

Should asking someone who has stopped on zig zag lines to move his car before the coppers arrive be considered illegal too?

As I said its the spirit of the law (or interpretation of the law) rather than the nitty gritty that is really important to me. I assume that its the police service themselves that have decided to take this action, rather than being under pressure from politians. I see no way that parliament could ever pass a law that would specifically outlaw this practice. If the majority of the population disagree with the way the law is enforced then it doesn't really have legitimacy.

Very true, but there was no internet then and very little chance to collate grievances or discuss misuse/over zealous use of what is a good law in principle.

There is now a very good medium that highlights such stupidity.

You could,rightly in my opinion, see this as a counterpoint to the States wide use of computers against us.

I suggest to you that the reason this thread even exists is due to a growing concern.

In fact it is self-evident.

The original article has no support at all except from those that would mourn its demise as a lessening of their powers to impose another kafka-esque bit of petty-minded Oblomovism.